The effects of paroxetine therapy on depressive symptom and motor function in the treatment of depression with Parkinson's disease: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Paroxetine therapy has been used for treatment of patients with depression and Parkinson's disease (dPD) in many clinical studies, but, the effects of paroxetine in dPD patients are not completely understood. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the effects of paroxetine therapy on depressive symptom and motor function in the treatment of dPD, in order to confer a reference for clinical practice. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of paroxetine for dPD published up to October, 2022 were retrieved. Standardised mean difference (SMD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was measured with the I2 test. The outcomes of interest were as follows: the efficacy, Hamilton depression rating scale score, unified Parkinson's disease rating scale score, Hamilton anxiety rating scale score or adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty-four RCTs with 2819 participants were included. Compared with control group, the pooled effects of paroxetine therapy on depression were (22 trials; OR 3.62, 95% CI 2.63 to 4.98, P < .00001) for antidepressant response (25 trials; SMD -2.14, 95% CI -2.73 to -1.56, P < .00001) for Hamilton depression rating scale score, the pooled effects of paroxetine therapy on motor function were (10 trials; OR 4.63, 95% CI 3.15 to 6.79, P < .00001) for anti-PD efficacy (18 trials; SMD -2.02, 95% CI -2.48 to -1.55, P < .00001) for total unified Parkinson's disease rating scale score. The Hamilton anxiety rating scale score showed significant decrease in the paroxetine treatment group compared to control group (10 trials; SMD -1.93, 95% CI -2.65 to -1.22, P < .00001). In addition, paroxetine therapy reduced the number of any adverse events obviously in dPD patients (twenty trials; OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.57, P < .00001). CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine therapy has clinical benefits for improvement of depressive symptom and motor function in dPD patients, moreover, it is of high drug safety. Further well-designed, multi-center RCTs needed to identify these findings.

SIRT3 expression alleviates microglia activation­induced dopaminergic neuron injury through the mitochondrial pathway.

The mitochondrial protein sirtuin 3 (SIRT3) can counteract cell damage caused by oxidative stress and inflammation, and contribute to cell survival primarily by improving mitochondrial function. However, the effects of SIRT3 in dopaminergic neuronal cells (DACs) remain unclear. In our previous studies, microglia activation-associated cytotoxicity was observed to promote the apoptosis of DACs, along with the decrease of SIRT3 expression. The aim of the present study was to explore the potential neuroprotective effect of SIRT3 expression against dopaminergic neuron injury caused by microglia activation, and clarify its possible mechanisms. SIRT3 overexpression in DACs reduced the production of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS), cell apoptosis rate, mitochondrial membrane potential (ΔΨm) depolarization, opening of mitochondrial permeability transition pore (mPTP) and cyclophilin D (CypD) protein level, and promoted cell cycle progression. However, SIRT3 siRNA-mediated knockdown further aggravated microglia activation-mediated cytotoxicity, including ROS accumulation, increased cell apoptosis and mPTP opening, elevated the CypD level, enhanced mitochondrial ΔΨm depolarization, concomitant to cell cycle arrest at G0/G1 phase. The mechanisms of SIRT3 mitigated microglia activation-induced DAC dysfunction, which included decreased mPTP opening and Bax/Bcl-2 ratio, inhibition of mitochondrial cytochrome c release to the cytoplasm, reduced caspase-3/9 activity, increased LC3II/LC3I and beclin-1 protein expression levels, and decreased nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain, leucine rich repeat and pyrin domain-containing protein 3 (NLRP3), caspase-1, IL-1ß and IL-18 protein expression. In conclusion, these results indicated that SIRT3 expression attenuated cell damage caused by microglia activation through the mitochondrial apoptosis pathway in DACs. The mitophagy-NLRP3 inflammasome pathway may also be associated with this neuroprotection. These findings may provide new intervention targets for the survival of dopaminergic neurons and the prevention and treatment of Parkinson's disease.

Comparison of pramipexole and levodopa/benserazide combination therapy versus levodopa/benserazide monotherapy in the treatment of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of pramipexole plus levodopa/benserazide (P+LB) combination therapy in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) compared to that of LB monotherapy, in order to confer a reference for clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of P+LB for PD published up to April 2020 were retrieved. Heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis were executed. Twenty-nine RCTs with 3017 participants were included. Clinical efficacy of P+LB combination therapy was significantly better than LB monotherapy (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.32, P<0.00001). Compared with LB monotherapy, the pooled effects of P+LB combination therapy on UPDRS score were (SMD -1.41, 95% CI -1.71 to -1.11, P<0.00001) for motor UPDRS score, (SMD -1.65, 95% CI -2.25 to -1.04, P<0.00001) for activities of daily living UPDRS score, (SMD -2.20, 95% CI -3.32 to -1.09, P=0.0001) for mental UPDRS score, and (SMD -1.60, 95% CI -2.06 to -1.15, P<0.00001) for complication UPDRS score. The HAMD score showed significant decrease in the P+LB combination therapy compared to LB monotherapy (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -1.80 to -0.84, P<0.00001). In contrast to LB monotherapy, P+LB combination therapy decreased the number of any adverse events obviously in PD patients (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.63, P<0.00001). In conclusion, P+LB combination therapy is superior to LB monotherapy for improvement of clinical symptoms in PD patients. Moreover, the safety profile of P+LB combination therapy is better than that of LB monotherapy. Further well-designed, multi-center RCTs needed to identify these findings.